1

CHAPTER ONE

BACKGROUND

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The problem of Road Traffic Accidents (RTAs) has being a huge one globally. Many

countries around the world are trying to put up interventions that would stop the increased

number of car crashes and pedestrians hit on the roads. Road accidents are a negative factor

to economic development both to the government and society. The government has to spend

colossal sums of money to treat accident victims who are usually admitted to government

hospitals and unfortunately these victims tend to be hospitalized for much longer periods of

time as compared to other patients. Families also have to spend a lot of money and time on

road accident victims. In the event of death, some families are left totally incapacitated as

some of these victims are bread winners. It was out of the realisation of the gravity of the

problem of road accidents that the researcher was prompted to investigate whether road

safety messages by the Road Transport and Safety Agency (RTSA) are working. In carrying

out the investigation, the researcher was attached to RTSA for three months and during this

period a lot of valuable information pertaining to the problem was gathered.

1.1 BACKGROUND TO THE PROBLEM

According to WHO (1999), the problem of deaths from RTAs has been acknowledged to be a

global phenomenon with people in power in most countries being concerned with the

increase in the number of people killed and seriously hurt on the roads worldwide. Major

studies of the causes of death globally have shown that by the year 2020 road traffic accidents

would be the sixth out of top 100 causes of fatalities around the globe. This trend is also

2

indicated in the creation of the Global Road Safety Partnership by the World Bank, the

International Federation of the Red Cross and Crescent Societies, bilateral aid organisations

and other interest groups under the structure of the World Bank’s Business Partners for

Development (BPD) Programme (ibid). In Zambia the situation is not different, road traffic

accidents have been ranked the third cause of death in the country. The Road Transport and

Safety Agency (RTSA) was established under the laws of Zambia to promote road safety by

educating the general public. There are alarming figures of road traffic accidents in the

country and this makes it imperative to establish whether or not the interventions put up by

RTSA to promote road safety are actually yielding results. The research focused on Public

Service Vehicles (P.S.V) drivers as these are on record to be by far with the highest fatalities

in single instances compared to private motor vehicles and cyclists.

According to RTSA (2011) trend curves have been defined for the number of road accidents,

the causalities, deaths and other relevant quantities and on the basis of surveys and analysis

carried out for most countries in the world. The state of affairs in Zambia has been compared

to countries in the globe. The number of vehicles per 10,000 persons had increased from 163

in 1964 to 332 in 1974, an increase of 103 per cent. Road traffic deaths had also increased by

170 per cent, increasing from 330 in 1964 to 890 in 1974, while the total number of accidents

had increased by 194 per cent, hitting the figure of 10,829 by the year 1974. The number of

deaths per 10,000 motor vehicles for the year 1974 was 57. If no preventable interventions

were taken, 1,100 road deaths were expected in 1980, 200 more than that recorded in 1974. In

1975 it was found out that the annual number of deaths per motor vehicle in the country was

ten times larger than the average for European countries. The ratio of deaths to the number of

injured people was also much higher than for neighbouring countries and about twice more

than that of the average in European countries (ibid).

3

According to (RTSA 2012), accidents in the country have greatly gone up in the recent years.

In 2011, in the second quarter of the year, the country recorded 5,402 road traffic accidents in

which 399 people died. In the third quarter of the year, the figure had gone up to reach 5,975.

A total number of 450 people died which reflected an upward percentage of 51 compared to

the second quarter figures of the same year.

According to RTSA (2010), the tables below show a summary of the road accidents between

2004 and 2007

PROVINCE 2004 2005 2006 2007

LUSAKA 6,222 6,646 10,513 10,889

COPPERBELT 3,173 3,530 4,105 5,400

CENTRAL 918 937 1,047 1,382

SOUTHERN 1,130 1,010 1,279 1,431

N. WESTERN 537 171 549 693

EASTERN 293 1,267 632 401

NORTHEN 254 101 443 569

LUAPULA 164 153 185 190

WESTERN 314 260 342 735

TOTALS 13,005 14,075 19,095 21,690

Figure1: Table showing accidents per province between 2004 and 2007

4

Accidents and Fatalities per 10,000 Vehicles: 2004-2007

YEAR ACCIDENTS PER 10,000

VEHICLES

FATALITIES PER 10,000

VEHICLES

2004 1,167 80

2005 1,004 62

2006 1,039 64

2007 951 56

Figure 2: Table showing accidents and fatalities per 10,000 from 2004 to 2007

According to RTSA (2012), in 2011, 22, 570 road traffic accidents were reported, this

indicated a significant increment compared to 15, 186 road traffic accidents reported in 2010

representing a 49 percent increase. Lusaka and Copperbelt provinces continued to record the

highest number of road traffic accidents due to the continued increase in motor vehicle

importation. Over 52,000 motor vehicles were imported in 2011 and this brought the

cumulative sum total to 381,948 motor vehicles in the country.

In 2011, a total of 212 deaths involving children aged 16 years and below were reported. This

represented 13 per cent of the total fatalities in the Country. Road traffic accidents are the

leading death cause among people aged between 10 and 24 years old. Injuries from road

crashes have become one of the significant causes of childhood morbidity and mortality in

Zambia but many of the accidents concerning these children are predictable and preventable.

Many of the accidents concern young ones playing on the roads, cyclists, new drivers and

passengers of public service vehicles (ibid).

5

Motor vehicle and Trailer Category

2010 2011

Motorcycle

9,450 11,345

Motor tricycle 135 245

Light Passenger Vehicle 204,465 236,830

Heavy Passenger Vehicle 6,514 6,897

Light Load Vehicle

66,287 72,899

Agric. Tractors

1,620 1,768

Heavy Load Vehicle

42,496 44,765

Trailers

6,345 6,954

Total 337,513 381,948

Annual Motor Vehicle Population

30,272 44,435

Figure 3: Table showing motor vehicle importation between 2010 and 2011

6

CAR = Central African Republic

DRC = Democratic Republic of Congo

STP = Sao Tome & Principe.

Figure 4: Figure of road death rates in Africa in 2010 (WHO 2013)

7

According to WHO (2013), Africa remains the least motorized of the six world regions, but

has the highest rates of road traffic deaths with 37 countries having death rates above the

global average of 18.0 deaths per 100 000 population. While the regional average for Africa

is 24.1 deaths per 100 000 population, for the 19 countries in the middle-income category,

covering 44 per cent of Africa’s population, the rate is 27.8 deaths per 100 000 population.

By comparison, the global average for middle-income countries is 20.1 deaths per 100 000

population.

1.1.1 Institutional Background of RTSA

According to RTSA (2010), the Agency was created under section 3 of the Road Traffic Act

number 11 of 2002.The Road Transport Act was enacted by the Zambian parliament in

December 2002.The Road Traffic Act number 11 0f 2002 was repealed by the National Road

Safety Council Act of CAP 471 of the laws of Zambia and parts V to XIV of the Road and

Road Traffic Act CAP 46 onto the Road Transport and Safety Agency. The possessions,

rights and obligations which soon before the appointment date belonged to the National Road

Safety Council and the Road Traffic Commission was correspondingly transferred and given

to RTSA. The nominated date for starting of work of the Agency was announced to be 14th

May 2004 by the Minister of Transport and Communication under the statutory instrument

No. 61 of the same year. RTSA is a corporate entity with perpetual existence and is able to

sue and being sued in its corporate frame.

1.1.2 FUNCTIONS OF RTSA

According to RTSA (2011), the main functions of the Agency are;

1. To implement policy on road transport, traffic management and road safety.

8

2. To register imported vehicles

3. To issue licences and driving permits

4. To pay out such percentages of monies into the Road Fund in respect of fees for

licences, permits and concessions granted and registration fees.

5. To conduct Road Safety Education through publicity campaigns and undertake and

assist in the dissemination of information on road safety

6. To coordinate road safety programmes

7. To formulate programmes designed to promote road safety in conjunction with local

authorities

8. To approve road safety programmes undertaken by anybody, institution or person.

9. To make contributions to the cost of road safety programmes undertaken by other

authorities or bodies and

10. To carry out such other activities as are conducive to the performance of RTSA

functions (bid).

1.1.3 COMPOSITION OF RTSA

RTSA (2011) indicates that the Agency was created under section 3 of the Road Traffic Act

No. 11 of 2002 and was ratified by the Zambian parliament on 31st December the same year

(2002). The Organisation comprises members coming from a diverse of background and

these include:

9

1. A representative of the Pensions and Insurance Authority

2. A representative of the Passengers Pedestrians and Cyclists Association of Zambia

3. A representative of the Persons with Disabilities recommended by the Ministry of

Community Development.

4. A representative of the Chartered Institute of Transport

5. A representative from the Passenger Transport Association

6. A representative from the Truckers Association

7. A representative of the Medical Council of Zambia

8. A representative of the Attorney General

9. A representative of the Ministry of Transport and Communication

10. A representative from the Ministry of Home Affairs

11. The Director or a representative from Road Development Agency

12. The Director of National Road Fund (ibid).

The Chief Executive Officer of the Agency is in charge of the running of the Agency and is

appointed by the Agency in talks with the Ministry of Transport and Communication. The

Director is also the Agency’s Secretary as well.

The Director is helped by two Deputy Directors; the Deputy Director of Transport and the

Deputy Director for Safety. The Agency also selects other members of staff with the

permission of the Minister as it deems essential for the carrying out of its functions under the

Road Traffic Act (ibid).

10

1.1.4 ZAMBIA’S COUNTRY PROFILE

According to the World Bank (2011), the Republic of Zambia is a landlocked country in

Southern Africa. Its neighbours; are the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Tanzania,

Malawi, Mozambique, Zimbabwe, Botswana and Namibia, and Angola. The capital city is

Lusaka, located in the south-central part of the country. The population is concentrated

mostly around Lusaka and the Copperbelt Provinces (ibid).

Zambia became under the British protectorate of Northern Rhodesia at the end of the

nineteenth century. During most of the colonial period, the country was governed by

administrators chosen from London with the British South Africa Company advice (ibid).

Zambia gained independence on 24th October 1964 from the United Kingdom and Kenneth

Kaunda became the first President. His National Independence Party (UNIP) was in power

from 1964 to 1991. From 1972 to 1991 the country was a single party entity with the UNIP as

the only political party. The goal of the party was to unite the nation under the slogan of 'One

Zambia, One Nation'. Frederick Chiluba of the Movement for Multi-Party Democracy

(MMD) took over President Kaunda after the 1991 general elections. Chiluba’s tenure of

office saw an increase in social-economic growth and raised decentralization of the

government. He (Chiluba) left Levy Mwanawasa as his successor; President Mwanawasa

ruled the country from January 2002 up to his untimely death in August 2008. He is

remembered for pioneering the campaign to reduce corruption and increase the standard of

living of the poor Zambians. After President Mwanawasa’s death in 2008, Rupiah Banda

took over as caretaker President before being elected president in the same year. He is

currently Zambia’s shortest serving president holding office for only three years. The late

11

Patriotic Front party leader, Michael Chilufya Sata defeated Rupiah Banda in the 2011

tripartite elections (ibid).

In the year 2010, the World Bank identified Zambia as one of the worlds’ fastest

economically transformed countries. Lusaka City is the location of the Common Market for

Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) headquarters (ibid).

1.1.5 ZAMBIA’S ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE

According to the World Bank (2011), Zambia has held five successful multiparty elections

since 1991. The peaceful general elections held in September 2011 further strengthened the

country’s democratic standing in the world and proved the country’s huge economic potential

grounded in its rich bestowment of abundant natural resources that include enormous land

and water bodies.

The country has a developmental plan through its Vision 2030 and the Sixth National

Development Plan (FNDP). The Plan is framed around the theme of “broad based wealth and

job creation through citizenry participation and technological advancement.” Specific

development goals include; fostering a competitive and outward-oriented economy, greatly

reducing hunger and poverty, and attaining middle income status. The number one step came

in July 2011 when Zambia was categorized a lower middle income country by the World

Bank (ibid).

According to the World Bank (2011), Zambia has in the past ten years undergone steady

rapid economic growth. An amalgamation of huge economic administration, free market

economy and privatization endeavours, ventures in the copper industry and related

infrastructure, and spiky upward adjustments in copper prices assisted to achieve an average

12

yearly growth of almost 5.8 per cent during the last 10 years. Foreign Direct Investment

(FDI) increased from about US$164.9 million in 2003 to US$1.73 billion in 2010 with much

ventures being in the mining sector, industrialisation, and wholesale and retail trade. The

Zambian government mixed macroeconomic stability under International Monetary Fund

(IMF) programs and managed to navigate the negative waves of the 2008 Global Economic

and Financial Crises. The yearly rate of inflation dropped from about 30 per cent in 2000 to

7.2 per cent in 2011. The debt relief also enhanced Zambia’s external position and aided in

building foreign-exchange reserves to more relaxing heights (ibid).

Nevertheless, Zambia’s economic growth has not resulted into noteworthy poverty reduction.

Sixty per cent of the Zambian population lives below the poverty column and 42 per cent are

marked to be in extreme poverty conditions. In addition, the absolute number of the poor has

increased from about six million in 1991 to 7.9 million in 2010. This is essentially due to

population increases. The urban areas are far better than the rural ones: Copperbelt and

Lusaka provinces, for example, have poverty incidences fairly low at only about 22 per cent

and 34 per cent respectively, in contradiction to the rest of the country, which is dominated

by peasant farming; poverty rates are higher than 70 per cent. Approximately 90 per cent of

Zambians who live below the extreme poverty bracket are concentrated in rural areas, and the

poverty gap difference is much higher for the rural population than their urban colleagues.

Speeding up growth and reducing poverty will entail increasing the competitiveness of the

Zambian economy by reducing the cost of doing business in the country and making sure that

the village economies, which upon the bigger part of the population depends for its living,

adds much to the overall growth of the economy. Regardless of the massive potential and

stated commitments to diversifying the country economy, the mining sector continues to be

the major driver of the Zambian economy (ibid).

13

1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

According to RTSA (2011), Zambia has a history of high traffic road accidents and

incidence; Road Traffic Accidents (RTAs) have been ranked the third highest cause of death

in Zambia after HIV and AIDS and Malaria. Lusaka province particularly accounts for about

half of the road accidents and a third of the fatalities at a huge cost to society. As a result of

the high population increase and enhanced socio-economic activities, Lusaka especially has

been experiencing a huge soar in the volume of traffic especially during the last 15 years. The

increase is mostly attributed to the growth of economic activities in the city and which has led

to surge of imports of used vehicles mainly from Japan as transport means to support these

enhanced economic activities.

The imported used Japanese vehicles have greatly increased the number of motor vehicles on

the Zambian roads. RTSA has disclosed that Zambia is contributing about 1,200 fatalities to

the global accidents recorded every year (ibid). With this increase in traffic, caution has to be

taken when one is using the roads so that they are neither the originator nor the sufferer of the

rising road traffic accidents in the country. In order for one to be road cautious, one has to be

equipped with the necessary information so that they have the knowledge of how to use the

road properly and they too are made to understand the laws and regulations surrounding

correct road usage in the country. RTSA is the entity given this huge responsibility and it is

therefore important to ascertain how far they are doing so as road accidents cause a lot of

misery for many families and which inevitably posses an enormous strain on the country’s

already inadequate resources.

The study was therefore undertaken to review and evaluate the role of RTSA in sensitizing

the community on road safety so that the number of accidents in the country can reduce. This

was undertaken with the background that while messages on road safety have been circulated

14

to the public by RTSA, the impact of these messages or interventions on the community has

not been adequately investigated.

1.3 RATIONALE

This research will bring a lot of benefits to the people of Zambia. It will help determine

whether or not the Road Transport and Safety Agency is conducting enough education to the

people of Zambia in addressing road safety and preventing avoidable accidents. With the

recent trend in the country where road accidents are ranked third in terms of being a cause of

death, it is important to ascertain whether enough sensitisation on road safety is carried out. It

is also vital to gauge the levels of knowledge of the public and also determine what attitudes

the people have over communications about road safety and good road usage.

With the low average incomes of most people in Zambia, the majority of the public cannot

buy cars on cash basis but rather have to save for a long period of time or they have to borrow

money from banks and/ or micro financial institutions to buy these cars. The effects of road

traffic accidents are immense and are both economic and social. Motorists have to spend

colossal sums of money to repair damaged cars from the accidents. Sometimes the accident

victims have to pay huge bills at health centres and worse still, others are permanently

incapacitated to carry out economic activities and therefore life becomes miserable or

uncomfortable as they have to depend on others for their livelihood. In addition some people

who die from the accidents whether drivers, passengers, cyclists or pedestrians are bread

winners meaning that their families remain suffering after these people’s demise. Even to non

bread winners, their families have to spend money on funeral ceremonies and coffins. This

money could have been channelled to more developmental projects if the likelihood of

accidents on the Zambian roads could be avoided. According to RTSA (2010), the majority

15

of the accidents in the country are not caused by mechanical failure but rather by human error

or misjudgement.

In addition to benefiting ordinary Zambians, the research will also benefit Zambia

particularly in the field of Communication for Development. The research will help

determine the effectiveness of certain strategies of communication for instance; the channels

employed and will determine which ones are more effective when it comes to sensitizing the

masses.

Therefore it is hoped that the study will help Government and RTSA and individuals who

would have interest in promoting road safety and reducing road accidents to come up with

workable interventions.

1.4 Objectives

1.4.1 General Objectives

The study aimed at investigating the effectiveness of RTSA messages in reducing road

accidents amongst the Public Service Vehicle (P.S.V) drivers. This was done with specific

reference to Lusaka P.S.V drivers.

1.4.2 Specific Objectives

It was wished that by the end of the study, a number of specific objectives would be

achieved. The study sought to, among other things:

1. To determine what aspects of road safety messages RTSA communicates to the public

and why.

2. To examine activities RTSA formulates to target P.S.V drivers.

16

3. To analyse the P.S.V drivers’ attitudes towards RTSA messages.

4. To examine channels RTSA uses to communicate to the public on road safety and why?

5. To investigate RTSA’s role in changing the drivers’ attitudes, knowledge and practices

with regard to road safety.

1.4.3 Research Questions

The study was based on a review and evaluation of RTSA messages in sensitizing P.S.V

drivers. Data for the study was collected by the researcher during the period of attachment at

RTSA from October to December 2012. The researcher was mandated to write a report on the

findings and experiences after the attachment. Among others, the study sought to find

answers to the following questions:

1. What messages does RTSA disseminate to the public on road safety?

2. How is the response of P.S.V drivers to efforts?

3. How does RTSA service the P.S.V drivers?

4. What channels does RTSA use to communicate to the public on road safety and why?

5. How have messages from RTSA transformed drivers’ attitudes, behaviour and practices on

the road?

17

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.0 Introduction

For decades now many people have lost their lives on the Zambian roads and world over.

Public service buses account for the majority of these fatal road accidents. It would be

inevitable then for one to tend to wonder what really the source of the increasing road traffic

accidents is. Do learner drivers get enough training before they are certified to drive or is it

that there are too many drivers who are drunk on the road or the drivers drive very long

distances and end up being tired and eventually dozing off whilst on the road. How much

road safety sensitisation are the road traffic agencies conducting in different countries around

the globe and what are the drivers’ attitudes towards these messages?

2.1 Literature Review

RTAs have become a thorny issue in most countries around the globe and it has been

suggested that for a country to fight road traffic accidents, concerted efforts are needed

among all the stake holders. Zambia combined efforts with other countries in the globe in

commemorating the start of the ‘United Nations Decade of Action for Road Safety 2011 to

2020, on 11th May 2011. The country is facing difficulties with reducing the soaring rates of

road traffic accidents. These accidents can somehow be attributed to the increase in the

importation of used vehicles, mainly from Japan. According to RTSA (2011), Zambia

Revenue Authority (ZRA) approximates that almost 300 used Japanese motor vehicles are

imported into Zambia every day. The Passengers, Pedestrians and Cyclists Association

(PAPECA) perceive this massive importation as a challenge for a developing nation like

18

Zambia and with a limited road network. This picture makes people vulnerable to soaring

road traffic accidents as a result of congestion on the roads (ibid).

According to Galvin, 1997) apart from the humanitarian aspect of road deaths and injuries in

developing countries, a strong case can be made for reducing road accidents on economic

grounds alone as they consume major financial resources that the countries, especially so for

developing countries could be put to better use if only the road accidents could be averted in

the first place. It should not be forgotten that in developing countries, road safety is one

among the numerous problems demanding funding and other resources. For many countries,

difficult decisions have to be made on the resources that could be devoted to road safety. In

order to help in the decision-making process it is important that a method be devised to

determine the cost of motor vehicle road accidents and the value of preventing them (ibid).

Galvin (1997), further adds that one of the first needs for cost figures of road accidents is at

the level of national resource planning to ensure that road safety is ranked equitably in terms

of investment in its betterment. Broad estimates are usually sufficient for this purpose, but

must be considerable with the competing economic sectors requiring funding. The second

need for accident cost figures is to make sure that the best use is made of any investment and

that the best safety improvements are brought in terms of the benefits that they will come up

in relation to the cost of their implementation. It has been observed that failing to link

specific costs with road accidents may certainly result in the use of widely varying methods

in the choice of measures and the assessment of projects that affect road safety measures.

Consequently, it is extremely unlikely that the pattern of expenditure on road safety will in

any sense not be mandatory in terms of equity. In particular, if safety advantages are paid a

blind eye in transport planning, there will inevitably be associated under-investment in road

safety sector which would lead to further soaring in road traffic accidents (ibid).

19

In line with Gavin (1997), RTSA (2012) also indicates that road accidents cause both

concrete and non concrete costs to the economy of any country. Among the concrete costs

include things such as; damage to vehicle; administrative costs; medical treatment; reduction

in output due to injury or death and insurance costs. Non concrete costs include pain, grief

and suffering and the risk of being involved in an accident. In economical terms, the cost of

road accidents to the economy of Zambia is estimated roughly to be at 3 per cent of the Gross

Domestic Product (GDP). The yearly costs of road accidents to the economy are in thousands

of kwacha, and as a result of all vehicles and medicines being imported, this figure finishes

the existing scarce foreign exchange available in the country’s economy. Road traffic

accidents have a direct impact on the social and physical aspects of the country. When an

individual has been in a road traffic accident, the family will most likely have to sustain the

medical costs or in the event of death, the whole family may become financially crippled or

dependant because the accident victims are the ones who took care of the family. Under such

miserable conditions, the family, who in many cases are female, will be compounded to seek

alternative sources of income such as prostitution to alleviate the poverty. This situation

could end up exposing these people to HIV and AIDS and children may become orphans

(ibid).

According to the Journal of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 6, using

Gross Output Methodology, which uses the Human Capital Approach to costing, economic

and social costs of accidents, has been calculated. Medicine costs and lost incomes of the

victims have been taken into consideration. Administrative costs earned by legal personnel

that are in charge of accident investigation were also taken into due consideration. Damage to

property such as vehicle repair costs were also figured out and were added up to the total

resources lost. An amount for the pain, grief and suffering of the victim and their dependents

20

was also summed up. The authors of the journal wish that road safety be given more

significance by providing a clear picture of the adverse effects of road accidents to the society

and economy of any country (ibid).

According to WHO (2013), Countries in the African Region have to make deliberate efforts

to improve the data required for planning and implementing interventions, and monitoring the

progress of road safety. Targets cannot be set in the absence of reasonable data on the major

risk factors, numbers and characteristics of people being injured and killed on the roads,

circumstances surrounding road accidents, and the extent to which interventions are being

used. The majority of countries are currently struggling with the lack of basic data, such as

the ages and sex of people killed on the roads, and prevalence of risk factors such as drink-

driving. Major investment is needed to change this. The resources that countries might want

to invest in interventions could be wasted if the agencies tasked with improving road safety

lack the data to help them plan. Countries cannot improve what they are not able to measure.

Therefore, there is need to carry out more research to come up with statistics that should be

used for road safety interventions.

According to The World Health Organisation (WHO 1999), road accidents would be the third

leading cause of death by 2010. It stated that the top causes of death globally were:

1. Lower Respiratory infections and Ischemic heart diseases

2. Diarrheal diseases and major depression

3. Conditions during prenatal and Road traffic injures

4. Major depression and Celebre Vascular disease

5. Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary disease

21

6 .Lower respiratory infections

7. Tuberculosis

8. Measles,

9. Congenital abnormalities

10. HIV and AIDS

The most economically sound and productive age group (those aged between and 15 and 44

years) appear prominently in road traffic accidents of people with wounds and deaths. This

invariably affects the country’s economy by the reduction effect it has on human resource

that it creates in the labour industry. Additionally, the physically challenged victims that are

usually in the lowest-income bracket earning capacity are extremely affected because they

rely on manual labour for their survival (ibid).

The situation in Zambia is not different from the global scenario. RTSA (2010) reports that

about 1,200 people die and 50,000 are left handicapped or permanently injured as a result of

traffic accidents every year. This is a huge figure considering that Zambia only has a

population of around 12.4 million people. The sky rocketing increment in second hand

Japanese cars on the roads and people driving drunk has added to the high numbers of road

traffic accidents and if preventable measures are not put into place to control the scenario,

deaths coming from road accidents will be the major source of untimely deaths for children

under the age of five years in the country (ibid).

Road traffic accidents are the cause of death for almost 1,000 people in the country per year

and injure many more. Road accidents have been placed as the third highest death causer in

the Country after HIV and AIDS and malaria and the second leading cause of death for

22

children and youths aged between five and twenty years old respectively and this has severe

impact on the homestead and the country at as a whole (ibid).

WHO (1994) reports that, road accident victims represent between 30 to 86 per cent of all

hospital admissions. Accident victims tend to keep on longer in the hospital than other

patients with different illnesses. In the Philippines, the Philippine University General

Hospital, for example, road traffic accidents contribute 25 per cent of the total admissions of

medical cases recorded. This has a serious negative blow on the capital of public hospitals

and the government as a whole as these hospitals carry an average of 25 to 75 per cent of the

victims’ total costs of medication and treatment. This is heightened by the fact that 80 per

cent of the seriously injured and 50 per cent of the slightly injured road victims seeks medical

attention in public hospitals (ibid).

WHO (1994) further states that Potential productive years of life are lost as a consequence of

accidents are also considered; lost output is obviously the biggest causality related cost

earned. It was established that the average age of fatalities is between 31 and 30 years for

accident injuries. This figure also included the days spent as a result of serious injury in

hospital before one eventually loses their life. It was stated that in order to count the social

cost and emotional burden accidents bring to the victims and their loved ones, a notional

amount to reflect pain, grief and suffering is added to the total risk and payment for the

avoidance of hypothetical risks of accidents (ibid).

According to Gavin (1997), forecasting future deaths globally has quite a number of

challenges. For instance, previous trends may be perceived to give a clear picture of what

may happen in the years to come. Nevertheless some countries, such as Japan for example,

experienced rapid worsening in road safety in the 1960s and 80 per cent growth in people

dying from road accidents but then with major investments, deaths reduced by almost 50 per

23

cent over the next 10 years. Even though, deaths started to increase once again in the

beginning of the 1980s due to a continual enlargement in motor vehicle ownership, this was

because there was a reduction in investment in life saving activities. It has been observed

additionally that, trends in many parts of the world are not stable and there is a lot of proof to

show that high increases in mortalities in Africa and Asia display signs of reduction though

rates in these regions are very still high and of major concern (ibid).

The Journal of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies vol. 6 further reports that

the most common method used in countries with heavy traffic, to portray the road traffic

situation in any country is the number of injury accidents per million vehicle kilometres per

year; this shows the relationship between accidents taking place to the measure of exposure to

traffic. Nevertheless, very few developing and under developed countries have motor vehicle

usage statistics and accidents data. What is portrayed instead is the number of reported

fatalities per 10,000 cars; this has been used by many firms to compare traffic safety statistics

between and among countries. Rates of fatality yet might be considered to be of little

significance to a country than the actual number of deaths occurring in a country. The

number of deaths reported per 100,000 people which is known as the fatality risk, is the most

common pointer used by the concerned sectors to rank diseases and other death causes.

WHO (1999) states that countries with high numbers of motor vehicles which represent 60

per cent of all vehicles in the world only have 14 per cent of deaths from accidents globally.

However Asia, Africa and Central Europe with about 16 per cent of vehicles contribute about

44 per cent of world accident deaths. In the developing countries, the only region where the

distribution of road fatalities and vehicles match is Latin America. It was stated that one of

the fundamental differences between developed and developing regions is that, over the last

decades the number of deaths occurring actually fell by about 10 per cent in Western Europe

24

and North America. In Africa, Asia and Latin America, road fatalities have continued to rise

(ibid).

Gavin (1997) states that most noticeably, death trends from accidents in South Africa and

Poland are different from other African and East European countries. The period from 1987

to 1995 deaths in the Asia Pacific region rose by 39 per cent, in Africa by 26 per cent but this

excluded South Africa and in the MENA region accidents rose by over 36 per cent, in the

Latin America region by over 100 per cent but this excluded Brazil. In Central and Eastern

Europe there was a big difference between Poland where deaths increased by 31 per cent with

the rest of the countries in the same region where deaths had reduced marginally. In Africa

and Asia, the majority of people who died the most were the drivers and passengers although

about 15 to 20 per cent represented pedestrians. In Asian countries, a marked variation was

seen with for instance, about 70 per cent of those killed in road traffic accidents being

pedestrians in Hong Kong and about 50 per cent for Korea. However in China, Malaysia and

Thailand, pedestrians who died from road accidents only stood at about between 10 to 15 per

cent of the total numbers recorded (ibid).

In contradiction, for Singapore, Taiwan (China) and Malaysia over half of the deaths

recorded were cyclists. When deaths involving pedestrians, non motor vehicle and

motorcycles are put together, to form the overall category of vulnerable Road Users (VRU),

statistics represent a big proportion of all people who died from accidents (ibid).

For Africa, pedestrians were once more one of the main classes of road users involved in fatal

road accidents. Pedestrian deaths also stood highly in the Middle East which stood at about

over 30 per cent of all deaths recorded. The analysis of deaths by gender indicated a huge gap

between men and women involved in fatal road accidents. In general there was a tendency for

25

females to be less involved in fatal accidents than in non fatal accidents in most regions of the

world (ibid).

Gavin (1997), further states that it was approximated that in 1999 alone between 750,000

and 880,000 people could have died as a result of road traffic accidents and that most of these

deaths took place in developing and emerging countries, with almost half in the Asia-Pacific

region. It was observed that deaths from road accidents were projected to continue to go up

with a death rate estimated to be at about between 900 thousand and 1.1 million by the year

2010 and between 1.1and 1.3 million by 2020. Projected estimates were taken into

consideration of accident cost globally and it was established that the cost globally, in 1998

was about US $ 520 billion and of this total amount the developing countries accounted for

almost US $ 65 billion. Trends from the available data also indicated that the total number of

people who died from road accidents in developing countries continued to go up (ibid).

Gavin (1997) continues that, however evidence shows that the rate of increase in deaths from

road accidents in the developing countries is currently reducing, especially in Africa as a

continent. The statistics collected however also indicate that the highest fatality rates in the

world also occurred in African countries, specifically in Ethiopia, Uganda, and Malawi.

Pedestrians were particularly found to be a risk group throughout the African and Asian

continents as well as the Middle East region. Passenger casualties were found to be

dominating in the developed countries with the highest statistics coming from Latin America

(ibid).

Herbst (2002) writes that, the prime factor to gauging attitudes towards road safety is linked

closely to general beliefs about risks and consequences. The teenagers especially show a wide

variety of attitudes and behaviour between males and females. Females tend to be

conservative and afraid of road risk behaviour and to the other extreme, males especially

26

those who have just finished school, care less about road safety. They frequently involve

themselves in illegal and dangerous driving activities. Unfortunately, but importantly, this

group appear to limit their learning of road safety to their own direct experience rather than

from other people. Herbst continues that the other important thing to note is that one

presentation on road safety will not reach all of the types of teenagers represented in one

group; different styles have to be used for the same group. Scholars have argued that the

minimal number of careless and anti-social drivers will not be moved by any message from

any one presentation. It is therefore important to formulate a future strategy where

consideration will only be given to developing approaches within the current frameworks to

persuade different groups of people. The two basic and pertinent approaches to road safety

are; firstly, to take road safety messages to the front of the brain of the driver or to make

passengers refuse to be driven by potentially dangerous drivers (ibid).

Herbst (2002) states that the message that has the biggest impact and which is more likely to

promote safe driving is the one which involves humanity especially the one which has to do

with the death or injury of friends or family. For Some young people, it was interesting to

establish that the injury or death of others was of higher pain than them being injured or

dying from road traffic accidents. The other one is the Human Consequences approach which

warns of danger and consequences of flouting traffic rules and regulations. This however,

does not work for some people, and it seems to be effective more especially with female than

male teenagers. For some males, the human consequences approach is perceived as not

practical but a matter of bad luck. They believe that when they are involved in a road accident

it is more a matter of being unfortunate than being a bad judge on the road. To these people,

fines and revocation of the driving licence seems to bother them most than anything else.

27

It is clear from the above scenario that there is need for organisations around the globe to

combine efforts in the making of messages on road safety and partnerships. RTSA has

partnered with the Ministry of Health and Non- Governmental Organisations to champion the

reduction of road traffic accidents in the country.

WHO (1994) states that road traffic accidents were the leading cause of early deaths for

young people globally. Road traffic accidents kill more than 1.3 million people and injure

almost 50 million people annually. In line with this, RTSA (2002) also has discloses that

Zambia is contributing about 1,200 deaths to the world accidents recorded each year and of

all the deaths recorded, over 50,000 people are left permanently incapacitated. The Agency

further points out that it is detrimental that money meant for national investments which

needs immediate attention is redirected to emergencies resulting from avoidable road

accidents. The Agency urges all the road users in Zambians to use all preventative measures

to change the road user behaviour in order to avert loss of life (ibid).

Herbst (2002) writes that over 95 per cent of road accidents involve some kind of negligent

driver behaviour combined with three other common factors. The first one is that drivers

usually try to blame poor road conditions; secondly they blame failure or mechanical fault of

the vehicle and lastly, they tend to blame other drivers for their own accidents. However, the

actual fact is that their behaviour is usually the major cause of accidents. Most accidents

occur because of excessive speed or bad driver behaviour. However, the risky behaviours are

usually not reported to relevant authorities (ibid).

28

CHAPTER THREE

CONCEPTUAL AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

3.0 Introduction

This chapter looks at the different conceptual and operational definitions. It is important to

define the different concepts and terms that will be considered in this research.

3.1 Conceptual and Operational Definitions

3.1.1 Communication

Communication is a seemingly simple process because it is something that people do almost

all the time and most often without even thinking about it. However, for communication to be

effective the messages are supposed to be clear, simple and brief. Miller, (2002) argues that a

definition of communication is not necessarily right or wrong, but more or less useful and

appropriate for the concerns of the scholar. This paper will take communication to be the

giving, receiving and or sharing or exchange of information. Some scholars have divided

communication into intrapersonal, interpersonal and group communication. Operationally,

communication is said to have occurred if there is a response or change of attitudes,

knowledge or behaviour.

3.1.2 Intrapersonal Communication

This communication is the use of language or thought that is internal to the communicator. In

simple terms it is communication within oneself.

29

3.1.3 Interpersonal Communication

This is the type of communication where there is a face to face sharing of information or

where individuals who may be members of a group interact by sharing information. It is the

type of communication that is used to strengthen human ties among people.

3.1.4 Group Communication

This is communication which takes place in small groups of people, usually not exceeding

twenty individuals. Group communication usually mixes both intrapersonal and interpersonal

communication interactions. Operationally, group communication involves a cluster of about

5 or more people.

3.1.5 Mass Communication

Mass communication is the dissemination or transmission of information to a mass audience

or mass society.

3.1.6 Message

This refers to the pieces of information or ideas after they have been encoded. In its simplest

terms a message can be defined as encoded information.

3.1.7 Channel

This is the physical means by which the message is communicated; it could be in written, oral

or visual form. Under each medium of communication there are several different channels.

30

3.1.8 Development

According to the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP 1999)), development is

defined as the process of expanding people’s range of choices- increasing their opportunities

for education, health care, income and development, and covering the full range of human

choices from a sound physical environment to economical and political freedom.

This definition of the concept places emphasis on:

� Enjoying a long and healthy life;

� The acquisition of knowledge;

� Having access to resources for a decent standard of living; and

� The freedom to exercise choice and participate in society.

3.1.9 Communication Strategy

A strategy is a systematic, well planned series of actions; it combines different methods,

techniques and tools to achieve intended change or objectives using available resources

within a specified time-frame. Operationally, a communication strategy could be used to

change the behaviour of people through the use of multi-media. For example, radio, to give

vital information and print media for a record to refer to later.

3.2.0 Knowledge

Knowledge is also a concept that has a very broad definition. It can be explained in different

ways as it also conveys various meanings in different cultural contexts. It has varying

meanings across the different ages in history. In this research knowledge will be considered

as the state of knowing. It will be looked at as familiarity with, awareness of something or

31

understanding of something gained through experience or study. It is the range of what has

been perceived, discovered or learned. According to the Free Merriam-Webster (2012),

knowledge is the fact or condition of knowing something with familiarity gained through

experience or association. It is acquaintance with or understanding of something. It is the

state of being aware of something. It is the sum total of what is known (ibid). One of the

ways of measuring the effectiveness of a communication strategy is by assessing the

knowledge a particular audience has about that subject. This knowledge can further be

measured by examining the attitudes or feelings and responses.

3.3 Theories

3.3.1 Self Fulfilling Prophecy

This theory looks at how people justify their perceptions of reality based on their beliefs and

thoughts and not what is actually pertaining on the ground. It is possible that the general

public perceives RTSA to be a law enforcing organisation and hence even when the Agency

is circulating messages about road safety, people would be thinking about the punishment and

fines rather than internalizing the communication.

3.3.2 Multi-Step Flow Theory

This theory states that it is not always possible to get your message directly to your intended

audience. Communication is facilitated by a filtering process. So to get road safety messages

across, RTSA would use public figures or opinion leaders to filter the message through to the

audience. These opinion leaders can for example state how they follow the Highway Code

and after doing so, they would influence the people to emulate them.

32

3.3.3 The Agenda Setting Theory

This theory states that the media sets the agenda for news for the audience. The media tells

the audience which media products are important. They tell consumers of media products

which products are at the top of the agenda. The choices the gate keepers make determine the

setting of this agenda. This theory is also applicable to this research. It is applicable in the

sense that the media can decide (it is likely they have been doing so) to put RTSA messages

at the bottom on the agenda. As such, RTSA road safety messages have not been

communicated adequately by the media though it is a very serious issue for discussion.

3.3.4 Diffusion of Innovation Theory

According to Rodgers, E.M (1995), Diffusion is the process by which an innovation is

communicated through certain channels over time among members of a social system.

Diffusion is a special type of communication concerned with the spread of messages that are

perceived as new. The four main elements of diffusion are; the innovation, communication

channels, time and the social system.

In his book Diffusion of Innovations, Rodgers defines diffusion as the process that is used to

spread new ideas from the source of the invention to the ultimate users or adopters. Rodgers

differentiates the adoption process from the diffusion in that the diffusion process occurs

within society, as a group process, where as the adoption process pertains to an individual.

Rodgers (1995) defines the adoption process as, “the mental process through which an

individual passes from the first hearing about adoption to final adoption”. This research will

use the theory of diffusion of innovations to ascertain the rates of adoption of RTSA

messages by individual members of the public.

33

CHAPTER FOUR

METHODOLOGY

4.0 Introduction

This chapter outlines the research design, the methods, the sampling procedure and the data

collection techniques, which will be followed by a brief discussion of the data analysis.

4.1 Research Design

A combination of descriptive and exploratory research approaches were used in this study.

4.2 Methods

The study used both the quantitative and the qualitative methods in its methodology.

4.2.1 Quantitative Survey

A total number of 110 questionnaires were distributed to the respondents. These bus drivers

were chosen from three major bus stations in Lusaka namely; Lumumba, Millennium and

Kulima Tower bus stations. These stations were chosen because they had lists of operators

and contact numbers, this made it easy to carry out systematic random sampling.

4.2.2 Qualitative Survey

4.2.3 Focus Group Discussions (FGDs)

The qualitative component of the study involved three FGDs at different bus stations in

Lusaka.

4.2.4 In-depth Interviews

Two in-depth interviews were conducted with various officers at RTSA.

34

4.2.5 Participant Observation

Participant observation and FDGs were held during the attachment period. Interviews were

conducted with relevant personnel at RTSA offices and also with P.S.V drivers.

Documentation was also used as a data collection mechanism, mainly at RTSA offices.

4.3 Sampling Procedure

For the quantitative survey, the study made use of purposive selection of the three busy bus

stations in Lusaka which also had a sampling frame of drivers. From the lists, systematic

random samples were selected for drivers to be interviewed. 110 questionnaires were

distributed, but only 102 were returned.

For the FGDs, the sampling frames were used to pick participants, and each group had six to

seven participants.

The purposive sampling technique helped to ensure that all relevant key personnel both at

RTSA and the study areas were captured. It also helped ensure that all individuals and groups

who possessed valuable information for the study were reached.

4.4.0 Data Gathering Techniques

4.4.1 Questionnaires in Quantitative Survey

A total of 110 questionnaires were distributed to a random sample of target audiences. The

questionnaires were seeking information patterning to levels of awareness of the RTSA

messages in the community. Using the likert-scale and or the semantic differential types of

questions in the questionnaires, the researcher sought to gain insight on the population’s

attitude towards RTSA. Questionnaires were used because of their unique ability to gather

information on a wide range of issues from a relatively large population area.

35

4.4.2 In-depth Interview

In-depth interviews were conducted with key personnel at RTSA head office and also with

the target community group. The researcher interviewed the Senior Manager of

Communications and Public Relations at RTSA and P.S.V drivers. The selection of the

interviews was based on among other things, the positions of the given officers and their roles

in the organisations or society. The purpose of these interviews was to have an insight of how

successful RTSA has being in achieving its set objectives.

4.4.3 Focus Group Discussions (FGDs)

Three FGDs were held. These were held with specific target groups; the discussions were

with P.S.V drivers to assess the attitudes of the drivers towards RTSA and the impact of

RTSA messages.

4.4.4 Participant Observation

This was done during the attachment period at RTSA and from interviews with the drivers.

The researcher sought to learn about the operations of RTSA whilst taking part in some of the

programmes of the institution. This proved very essential to study the communication

systems of the Organisation.

4.4.5. Data Analysis

The data that was gathered was analysed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences

(SPSS), tables, graphs and charts. The SPSS was used to establish how certain variables

interacted and affected behaviour patterns as it related to drivers attitudes towards RTSA

messages.

36

4.5 Ethical Considerations

The research was held for purely academic purposes and confidentiality was promised and

upheld to all sources of information before interviews and FGDs were held. No pressure

whatsoever was applied to force the participants to participate in the research and prior

consent was obtained before the participants were engaged in the research.

4.6 Limitations of the study

The quantitative study was confined to Lusaka bus drivers, particularly those from Kulima

Tower, Millennium and Lumumba bus stations. This is because these stations have lists of

operators and their contact numbers hence it was easy to contact the drivers to participate in

the research.

37

CHAPTER FIVE

PRESENTATION OF RESEARCH FINDINGS

5.0 Introduction

This chapter shows the findings of the study. The major component of these will be extracted

from the data gathered from the questionnaires that were administered to the members of the

general public in the study areas as well as from the FDGs with the P.S.V drivers. Other

sources of the data presented came from the in-depth interviews with the RTSA Publicity

Office officials and also with the P.S.V drivers.

5.1 General Public Questionnaire

The questionnaire that was administered to the members of the public used the KAPS

(Knowledge, Attitude, Practices and Skills) approach. It was designed to establish the

knowledge levels, the attitudes, the practices and skills of the respondents. It sought to

establish the approximate levels of knowledge of road craft in the community. The

questionnaire also aimed at finding out the respondents attitudes towards RTSA road safety

messages.

For purposes of administration of the questionnaire to members of the general public, the

study was divided into three locations in Lusaka, namely: Lumumba, Kulima Tower and

Millennium bus stations. 50 per cent of the respondents came from Kulima Tower bus station

and 25 per cent came from Millennium and Lumumba bus stations respectively. No

questionnaires were administered to City Market bus station operators because there was no

organised list of operators at the Station.

A total number of hundred and ten (110) questionnaires were administered to the sample

population. This number of respondents was reinforced by interviews and FGDs that were

conducted with various personnel and interest groups in the study area.

38

Most questionnaires were distributed to Kulima Tower bus station drivers because the station

has a larger number of listed operators as compared to Millennium and Lumumba bus

stations. The proceeding paragraphs discuss the findings of the research.

5.1.1 Age distribution of respondents

What is your age group?

Frequency Percent Valid Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid 16-25 years 24 23.5 23.5 23.5

26-35 years 55 53.9 53.9 77.5

36-45 years 16 15.7 15.7 93.1

46 and above 7 6.9 6.9 100.0

Total 102 100.0 100.0

Figure 5: Age distribution of the public questionnaire respondents

The study used random selection of the respondents on whom the public questionnaire was

administered; this was because the respondents in the study came from different

backgrounds, with different educational levels, marital status and age groups. In terms of the

age groups, the respondents were between 16- 55 age range. The majority of them came from

the age group of 25-35 years as shown in the chart above.

39

5.1.2 Education distribution of respondents

Level of education attained

Frequency Percent Valid Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid Grade 1-7 6 5.9 5.9 5.9

Grade 8-`12 90 88.2 88.2 94.1

College 4 3.9 3.9 98.0

University 2 2.0 2.0 100.0

Total 102 100.0 100.0

Figure 6: Table showing Education levels of the respondents

The majority of the respondents (88.2%) went up to secondary school level. This was

followed by 5.9 per cent who had attended primary school education and 3.9 per cent who

had gone up to college education. The least percentage was that of those who had attained

university, which stood at 4 per cent.

5.1.3 Knowledge of RTSA

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid Yes 99 97.1 97.1 97.1

No 3 2.9 2.9 100.0

Total 102 100.0 100.0

Figure 7: Table showing awareness levels of RTSA

Most of the respondents who answered the questionnaire stated that they knew RTSA and a

few indicated that they did not know RTSA. 97.1 Per cent of the respondents stated that they

40

knew RTSA and its functions where as 2.9 per cent indicated they were aware of the

existence of the institution but they did not know its purpose.

5.1.4 What main activities of RTSA do you know?

Frequency

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

Valid Issuance of driver's licences 10 9.8 9.8 9.8

Road safety provision 24 23.5 23.5 33.3

Impounding traffic offenders 2 2.0 2.0 35.3

Educating the public on road safety 8 7.8 7.8 43.1

Issuing licences and road safety 27 26.5 26.5 69.6

Impounding traffic offenders and educating public

8 7.8 7.8 77.5

Control traffic and give licences 18 17.6 17.6 95.1

Controlling traffic and issuing number plates

2 2.0 2.0 97.1

Issue licences and impound careless drivers cars

2 2.0 2.0 99.0

Check vehicle fitness, give licences and impound faulty cars

1 1.0 1.0 100.0

Total 102 100.0 100.0

Figure 8: Table showing the main activities of RTSA from questionnaires by respondents

In establishing what kind of activities the community knew RTSA was involved in, most of

the respondents (26.5%) stated that RTSA was involved in the issuance of drivers’ licenses

and providing road safety. The second highest (23.5%) indicated that RTSA was responsible

for providing road safety in the country. The third highest response was that RTSA controls

traffic, issues out drivers’ licenses and car number plates. The other responses represented

very minimal figures statistically.

41

5.1.5 Do you use radio as a source of information?

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid Yes 101 99.0 99.0 99.0

No 1 1.0 1.0 100.0

Total 102 100.0 100.0

Figure 9: Table showing respondents who used radio as a source of information

In the quest to determine which sources of information the respondents mainly used, it was

established that almost all the respondents (99%) indicated that they used radio as a main

source of information and only 1 per cent indicated not to have used radio as their main

source of information.

5.1.6 Do you use T.V as a source of information?

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid Yes 98 96.1 96.1 96.1

No 4 3.9 3.9 100.0

Total 102 100.0 100.0

Figure 10: Table showing respondents who use radio as a source of information

The researcher found out that most of the respondents used T.V as one of their main sources

of information and very few did not use it as a main source. 96.1 per cent of the respondents

indicated that they used T.V as one of their main sources of information and 3.9 per cent

showed that they did not use T.V as a main source of acquiring information.

42

5.1.7 Do you use newspaper as a source of information?

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid Yes 97 95.1 95.1 95.1

No 5 4.9 4.9 99.0

Total 102 100.0 100.0

Figure 11: Table showing respondents who use newspapers as a source of information

The majority (95.1%) of the respondents stated to have used newspapers as one of their main

sources of information and only very few (3.9 %) of the total respondents indicated that they

did not read newspapers.

5.1.8 Do you use the internet as a source of information?

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid Yes 11 10.8 10.8 10.8

No 91 89.2 89.2 100.0

Total 102 100.0 100.0

Figure 12: Table showing respondents who use the internet as a source of information

The research found out that the majority of the respondents (82.9%) did not use the internet

as one of their main sources of information while only 10.8 per cent of the respondents stated

that they used the internet as a source of information.

43

5.1.9 How often do you get RTSA messages on radio?

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid Every hour 6 5.9 5.9 5.9

Every day 78 76.5 76.5 82.4

Every week 12 11.8 11.8 94.1

Every month

5 4.9 4.9 99.0

Never 1 1.0 1.0 100.0

Total 102 100.0 100.0

Figure 13: Table showing frequency of RTSA messages gotten on radio

The study found out that most of the respondents (76.5%) heard at least a RTSA message on

radio every day. This was followed by 11.8 per cent who indicated that they heard RTSA

messages at least once a week on radio. The least percentages were 5.9 and 4.9 that indicated

that they heard the messages every hour and every month respectively.

5.2.0 How often do you get RTSA messages on T.V?

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid Every hour 3 2.9 2.9 2.9

Every day 46 45.1 45.1 48.0

Every week 39 38.2 38.2 86.3

Every month

8 7.8 7.8 94.1

Never 6 5.9 5.9 100.0

Total 102 100.0 100.0

Figure 14: Table showing frequency of RTSA messages gotten from T.V

The biggest percentage of respondents regarding frequency of RTSA messages on T.V was

every day (45.1%). The next was 38.2 per cent which reported that they got RTSA messages

44

at least once a week. This was followed by 7.8 per cent and 5.9 per cent which represented

‘every month’ and ‘never’ respectively.

5.2.1 How often do you get RTSA messages from newspapers?

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid Every hour 1 1.0 1.0 1.0

Every day 26 25.5 25.5 26.5

Every week 29 28.4 28.4 54.9

Every Month

23 22.5 22.5 77.5

Never 23 22.5 22.5 100.0

Total 102 100.0 100.0

Figure 15: Table showing frequency of RTSA messages gotten from newspapers

The study established that the majority of respondents had read about RTSA messages in

newspapers at least once per week (28.4%). This was followed by 22.5 per cent which

represented ‘every month’ and ‘never’ responses respectively. The lowest percentage was 1

per cent which reported that they had read RTSA messages in newspapers every hour.

5.2.2 How often do you get RTSA messages from the internet?

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid Every day 1 1.0 1.0 1.0

Every week

2 2.0 2.0 2.9

Never 99 97.1 97.1 100.0

Total 102 100.0 100.0

Figure 16: Table showing frequency of RTSA messages gotten from internet

45

The majority of the respondents (97.1%) indicated that they never got RTSA messages on

road safety from the internet. This was followed by 2 per cent which reported that they got

RTSA messages from the internet once a week. The lowest percentage was 1 per cent which

represented ‘Every day’.

5.2.3 Do you get RTSA messages through road shows?

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid Yes 93 91.2 91.2 91.2

No 9 8.8 8.8 100.0

Total 102 100.0 100.0

Figure 17: Table showing frequency of RTSA messages gotten from road shows

Most respondents (91.2%) indicated that they had gotten RTSA messages from Road Shows

while 8.8 per cent indicated that they had not.

5.2.4 Is RTSA a good or bad initiative?

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid Good 89 87.3 87.3 87.3

Bad 12 11.8 11.8 99.0

Not

sure 1 1.0 1.0 100.0

Total 102 100.0 100.0

Figure 18: Table showing attitudes of respondents towards RTSA

46

Most respondents (87.3%) thought RTSA was a good initiative and only 11.8 per cent of the

respondents thought RTSA was a bad idea. A very minimal percentage (1%) was not sure

whether RTSA was a good or bad initiative.

5.2.5 Give reasons why RTSA is a good or bad initiative

Frequency Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid Drivers feel safe knowing RTSA is

around 28 27.5 27.5 27.5

People without licence are not allowed

to drive 25 24.5 24.5 52.0

It reduces contravening of traffic

offences 8 7.8 7.8 59.8

They are not corrupt like the police 3 2.9 2.9 62.7

They reduce accidents 7 6.9 6.9 69.6

They are not corrupt like the police and

they reduce road accidents 9 8.8 8.8 78.4

They impound cars of innocent drivers 7 6.9 6.9 85.3

Reduce accidents and control traffic 6 5.9 5.9 91.2

They are corrupt 4 3.9 3.9 95.1

They are not corrupt and impound

unlicensed drivers 2 2.0 2.0 97.1

They misuse their powers 2 2.0 2.0 99.0

No response 1 1.0 1.0 100.0

Total 102 100.0 100.0

Figure 19: Table showing reasons for respondents’ attitudes towards RTSA

47

The study found a wide variety of responses for reasons why they thought RTSA was a good

or bad initiative. The largest number (27.5%) stated that they felt safe on the road when

RTSA was patrolling. This was followed by 24.5 per cent which indicated that RTSA was a

good idea because it made sure that unlicensed drivers were not allowed on the roads. The

other reasons that were given represented low percentages each representing less than 9 per

cent. 8.8 per cent thought that RTSA was good because its officers were not corrupt as

compared to police officers and 7.8 per cent of the respondents wrote that RTSA was good

because it reduced bus drivers contravening of traffic rules. 6.8 per cent stated that RTSA

was good as it helped reduce road accidents and 2 per cent indicated that RTSA was good as

its officers were not corrupt and impounded traffic offenders. However, 6.8 per cent of the

respondents thought RTSA was a bad idea because some RTSA officers at times impound

vehicles without valid reasons and 2 per cent wrote that RTSA officers sometimes abused

their powers and intimidated innocent bus drivers. 3.9 per cent of the respondents stated that

RTSA was not a good initiative as some of its officers were corrupt.

5.2.6 Is RTSA your main source of information on road safety?

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid Yes 84 82.4 82.4 82.4

No 18 17.6 17.6 100.0

Total 102 100.0 100.0

Figure 20: Table showing whether RTSA was the respondent’s main source of information on

road safety

Concerning RTSA being the main source of information on road safety, a large percentage of

the respondents (82.4%) reported that it was and only 17.6 per cent indicated that RTSA was

not their main source of information on road safety.

48

5.2.7 Do you think RTSA messages are effective?

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid Yes 79 77.5 77.5 77.5

No 23 22.5 22.5 100.0

Total 102 100.0 100.0

Figure 21: Table of respondents’ view on RTSA’s messages effectiveness

5.2.8 Give reasons why RTSA messages are effective/ineffective

Frequency

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

Valid Reduces road accident 22 21.6 21.6 21.6

People follow rules because of RTSA 35 34.3 34.3 55.9

RTSA controls traffic 3 2.9 2.9 58.8

You feel safe when RTSA is near 4 3.9 3.9 62.7

RTSA control traffic/reduce accidents 4 3.9 3.9 66.7

They reduce accidents and control traffic 4 3.9 3.9 70.6

They do not conduct road shows 5 4.9 4.9 75.5

RTSA is not in rural areas 3 2.9 2.9 78.4

Little information for children and blind 2 2.0 2.0 80.4

No response 20 19.6 19.6 100.0

Total 102 100.0 100.0

Figure 22: Table showing reasons for respondents’ view of whether RTSA’s messages are

effective or not

49

As to whether RTSA messages on road safety were effective, most of the respondents

(77.5%) thought that the messages were effective. This was represented by 77.5 per cent. The

number of respondents who thought that the messages from RTSA were not effective stood at

22 per cent.

5.3 FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSIONS (F.G.Ds)

FDGs were one of the major sources of data for the research. The researcher got direct

information from the discussants and therefore a very wealthy tank of information was

gotten. The researcher conducted three group discussions in three different locations in the

sample area. The first discussion was held with the bus drivers at Kulima Tower Bus Station,

the second was with Millennium Bus Station and the third was held with the drivers at

Lumumba bus station.

The FGDs were designed to seek information relating to the attitudes of the public service

drivers in Lusaka towards RTSA messages and the levels of awareness of road safety rules

and the Highway Code. The other information which the FGDs endeavoured to bring out was

to establish whether the messages by RTSA had a positive impact on the drivers in terms of

being road craft. Finally, the discussions sought to obtain information relating to the

challenges the bus drivers had in putting to practice the road safety messages they got from

RTSA.

50

5.4 INTERVIEWS WITH RTSA PERSONNEL

Two interviews were held with the RTSA Senior Manager for Communication and Public

Relations. Like the FGDs, the interview with the RTSA personnel was a rich source of

information on a range of topics including types of awareness messages, the skills and

practices and content of the education.

51

CHAPTER SIX

DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS

6.0 Interpretation of key Findings

This chapter discusses the main findings of the study. This is done in line with the set

objectives of the study and with reference to three main aspects of the study. The first aspect

has to do with how RTSA has formulated messages to target the local communities. The

second aspect centred on how RTSA activities have benefited the local communities. Finally,

the study evaluated how the drivers’ practices have being changed by RTSA messages and

programmes. These discussions are based on both the implications of the findings as was

established from the analysed findings as well as the observations from the researcher during

the study.

6.1 Research question one: What messages does RTSA disseminate to the public on

road safety?

In determining specifically what sort of messages the bus drivers had gotten from the

Organisation, most of the drivers stated that they mainly got three messages from the Agency.

The first one was not to drink and drive. The second one was not to over speed “Speed Kills”.

The last one was to always wear seat belts ‘Buckle up’. Concerning the first two messages,

the drivers interviewed and those that were engaged in the FGDs were in total agreement to

the messages. They all seemed to have had agreed with the messages and were likely to

implement what the messages required and maybe even encourage other drivers.

However, when it came to the third message, concerning wearing seat belts, there was a

debate amongst the group. Whilst some drivers took the message positively, some had mixed

52

ideas concerning the practice. They had the conception that a seat belt could save a person

but at the same time could act as a death trap depending on the circumstance.

One discussant particularly narrated an incident where an over speeding bus driver was killed

after the bus over turned and rolled over several times because the driver was plugged in and

hence trapped by the belt. Therefore, according to the discussant, the seat belt was the cause

of death of his colleague. He believed that if the colleague did not have the belt on, maybe he

(colleague) would have been thrown out of the car and survived. The bus conductor however

survived because he was not in the seat belt. He was thrown out from the window and hence

he did not crash with the car.

Figure 23: Table showing the level of education of the respondents

There is need for RTSA to sensitize and clarify to the public the exact operation of a seat belt

and its advantages before the misconception becomes the practice for most of the drivers.

53

This is coupled with the fact that most of the drivers are not very educated and consequently

presumably not very well enlightened on scientific innovations such as the technology behind

the innovation of the seat belt.

Apart from the earlier mentioned main messages stated, very few of RTSA communications

were mentioned by the drivers. For example during the interviews and FDGs, no driver stated

that they had received a message on being courteous to other road users apart from it being

mentioned in the Ten basic rules of driving by RTSA. Some drivers blamed the poor road

network and the increased number of vehicles as being a contributing factor to lack of

courtesy. They stated that when one was too courteous and allowed everyone who asked to

join the road in front of them, that driver would never meet the days’ cashing requirement.

When it came to courtesy with their passengers, all the drivers interviewed stated that they

had at least once argued with a passenger. Two drivers unfortunately even indicated to have

gone to the extent of having fought with passengers. The most interesting thing concerning

the matter was that all the drivers had put the blame on the passengers as being the root cause

of these arguments. They accused some passengers of just being ‘too difficult’ and this forced

them to take desperate measures in dealing with such kind of personalities.

The other issue which the bus drivers stated not to have had received any messages on, was

the issue of beating traffic lights. Most drivers interviewed indicated that they knew it was an

offence to beat traffic lights. However, when they were asked the source of this information

they indicated that they got the information either from colleagues or other sources, not that

RTSA had educated them on the subject.

The other common issue which evidently needed sensitisation by RTSA was the issue of

using tree branches when the car had a break down. During the research it was established

that almost all the drivers knew that they were supposed to use triangles in front of and

54

behind the car. However, about half the number of the drivers did not really understand why

triangles were recommended to them; the only advantage the triangles had over the tree

branches was that triangles were more visible at night.

According to the Diffusion theory messages cannot be directly delivered to the target

audience and the innovator receives a desired outcome. The message developer has to use

Change Agents, local people who the target audience hold in high esteem and therefore more

willing to listen to and adopt the new innovation. RTSA can constantly engage Change

Agents to spread their messages. Specifically people who own large fleets of buses, for

instance, the proprietor of Mazhandu Bus Services could be used because obviously he

inspires many bus drivers.

The two basic and pertinent approaches to road safety are; to take road safety messages to the

front of the brain of the driver and the Human Consequences Approach, which warns of

danger. It is important to note that neither of these two approaches alone nor the use of

Change Agents only can be effectively used to bring about desired behaviours. However, a

combination of all the three approaches could be more effective as it would carter for a wider

number of personalities.

6.2 Research question 2: How is the response of PSV drivers to RTSA efforts?

The questionnaire that was administered to the members of the general public had questions

that among other things sought to get information from the respondents patterning to their

knowledge, attitudes and practices.

Most drivers interviewed and from the FDGs perceived RTSA as a strict and tough law

enforcing organisation that could not be corrupted. Some drivers specifically indicated to

have changed direction whenever they noticed the presence of RTSA in front of them, even

55

when they had not broken any single traffic regulation. This line of thought by the drivers

renders RTSA messages ineffective because of their (drivers’) poor attitude towards the

Organisation. Hence using the Self Fulfilling Prophecy, it is possible that even when the

Organisation is there to be of valuable service to the public, people think more about the

punishment and fines of flouting traffic rules rather than appreciating and internalizing the

communication.

Furthermore, in its formulation of its road safety messages RTSA can make use of the

Cognitive Dissonance theory to target its audience. Their messages must be accompanied by

appropriate examples and practical models. This will help mitigate effects of phenomena

such as selective attention; selective perception, among other factors, is caused by selective

retention.

Notwithstanding the above, it was discovered that generally most of the bus drivers thought

that RTSA was a good initiative; the Agency just has to come up with more appropriate

means of communication to specifically target and convince the bus drivers. In as much as

the drivers were aware and appreciated RTSA messages and their presence on the road, they

still contravene traffic regulations like over speeding and over loading so just they could meet

the day’s cashing requirement.

In Kenya, where they mostly use motorcycles as public transportation, the situation is not

different from the Zambian scenario. For one to legally drive a motorcycle in Kenya, one

must be aged 18 years or above and possess a valid driving license, wear a helmet and wear

reflective clothing. Helmets have been proven to reduce the risk of head injury by 69 per cent

and death by 42 per cent in the event of an accident. However, most of the drivers despite

ferrying passengers do not adhere to the set regulations but statistics indicate that motorcycles

represent 70 per cent of vehicles registered in Kenya each year.

56

There is need for RTSA to come up with workable interventions that would particularly work

for middle aged male drivers as a special entity. This is because most of the drivers are male

and are within the youth age bracket (below 35 years).

According to (WHO) 1999, the most economically sound and productive age group (those

aged between and 15 and 44 years) appear prominently in road traffic accidents of people

with wounds and deaths globally. This invariably affects the country’s economy by the

reduction effect it has on human resource that it creates in the labour industry. In the research,

100 per cent of the drivers sampled were male and most of them belonged to the 25-35 years

age group.

Unfortunately, according to the Human Consequences Theory, males have been proven to

display more risky behaviours than females. According to this theory the drivers willingly

choose to engage in risky driving behaviours and when they are caught for flouting traffic

rules or they are involved in a road traffic accident, they see it more as a matter of bad luck

than a consequence of their actions.

Youths are also known to generally be care free with most things and this includes being

careless on the road. This combination of being male and youth makes the retention of road

safety messages compromised; males tend to engage more in risky behaviour than females

and within the male group, youths have being proven to tend to indulge more in reckless

behaviours than other age groups. There is need for research to be conducted to find out how

best to deal with middle aged male public service drivers concerning adherence to road safety

regulations.

57

Figure 24: Chart showing sex distribution of respondents

Figure 25: Chart showing age distribution of respondents

58

Studies involving road safety particularly those dealing with public service drivers and their

road behaviour do not exist or are still in their infancy in most countries. It is as a result of

this trend that the researcher found no literature review on how bus drivers respond to

interventions by road safety agents in different parts of the world.

6.3 Research question 3: How does RTSA service the PSV drivers?

The drivers showed knowledge of most of the services that RTSA was involved in. The

majority of the respondents stated that RTSA was involved in the issuance of drivers’

licenses and providing road safety. The second highest number of respondents indicated that

RTSA was responsible for providing road safety in the country. The third highest response

was that RTSA controls traffic, issues out drivers’ licenses and car number plates.

In order to serve the community better, the Agency has introduced computer-based driving

tests in order to eliminate the human interference in the conduct of theory driving tests. The

project however is still being designed in partnership with TEVETA, which will act as the

examination body.

In the area of motor vehicle safety as an avenue for achieving road safety, RTSA has

procured motor vehicle equipment that will be used for the mechanisation of motor vehicle

testing; the pilot project for this undertaking is Lusaka. The Agency has also procured a

motor vehicle inspection centre, which will help to enhance the testing standards and bring

about objective results in order to improve road worthiness standards of vehicles on the

Zambian roads.

To ensure that services are delivered efficiently, RTSA has outsourced its services

particularly the issuance of road tax; this was implemented in partnership with the Zambia

State Insurance Corporation (ZSIC) and Zambia Postal Services (Zampost). This move

59

helped to decongest the RTSA offices and took the road tax service closer to the people

especially those in remote communities where there are no RTSA offices.

According to RTSA (2012), in its service delivery, one of the challenges the organisation

faced was the timely and efficient issue of drivers’ licenses. For example in 2011,whilst the

Agency managed to conduct 890,460 transactions, it was the road tax license that had the

highest number of transactions standing at 756,178 and hence accounting for 85 per cent of

all transactions. The driver’s license on the other hand accounted for only 13 per cent of all

transactions the Agency made. However the Agency has since changed the printing solution

for printing cards with the view of improving productivity from 500 driver’s licenses per day

to 700 licenses per hour. Over 112,545 drivers’ licenses were therefore printed in 2011

compared to 73, 363 in 2010 before the introduction of the new solution.

However, it was observed during the research that very few people knew that RTSA had the

mandate to educate the public on road safety. From the 102 questionnaires received from the

study, only 7.8 per cent of the respondents indicated that they knew of RTSA’s mandate to

educate the public on road safety. It is important that RTSA makes people aware of this

mandate as it can reduce people’s perception of the Organisation being a law enforcing

agency. RTSA’s primary duties among other things include: To conduct Road Safety

Education through publicity campaigns and undertake and assist in the dissemination of

information on road safety for the benefit of the community, to formulate programmes

designed to promote road safety in conjunction with local authorities and to approve road

safety programmes undertaken by anybody, institution or person.

It is cardinal that RTSA comes up with awareness campaigns to inform the public that its

primary mandate is ensure the safety of all road users rather than punish culprits. There must

60

be deliberate messages formulated such as ‘RTSA is your Friend’ to raise public awareness

of RTSA’s education and road safety roles.

Figure 26: Graph showing main activities of RTSA respondents knew

The literature from around the world does not indicate any specific ways in which public

service bus drivers are serviced as a different entity; the services offered are in general and

target all the motorists in respective countries.

61

6.4 Research question 4: What channels does RTSA use to communicate to the public

on road safety and why?

RTSA mainly uses Mass Communication to send out messages to road users. The main

channels used are radio, T.V and newspapers. These channels are used because they cover a

wide coverage of audience. This is coupled with the fact that the number of motor vehicles

has greatly increased in the country and one way to cover all the motorists is through mass

media. One of the challenges of using Mass Communication as a media of communication is

that usually the people in charge of sending out messages could adopt the Agenda Setting

Theory. It was observed during the research that some RTSA messages were more prominent

than others. For example three main messages stood out; ‘Don’t drink and drive’, ‘Speed

kills’ and always wear a seat belt, ‘Buckle up’. The reason for the prominence of the first two

messages could be that they account for the cause of most road accidents and the third

message is significant because failure to wear a seat belt could lead to loss of life if a car

crashed.

However, the fact that some accidents are caused by statistically low reasons does not mean

that they should not be addressed. For example if beating traffic lights was responsible for

causing 10 per cent of the accidents in Zambia, it does not mean that it should be put on the

bottom of the agenda. The best approach would be to bring to the front of the mind of all

motorists, all the road safety precautionary messages.

One of the best ways to spread RTSA messages is to use the Multi- Step Flow Theory. It has

being proven that if Change Agents are used, the communication is usually effective. RTSA

could consistently use people who are influential in society for instance political leaders or

musicians. If the former Republican President, Dr. Kenneth Kaunda (K.K) was used as a

Change Agent and used to disseminate the RTSA messages people would listen to him more

than if an ordinary person was used. This is because most individuals hold him in high

62

esteem and others even consider him to be their role model and would be very willing to

implement advice he would have to offer. RTSA currently uses some Change Agents but this

is not intensified.

Road shows were also an initiative that almost all the drivers indicated to have received

RTSA messages from. These are very good ways of informing people as they use

infotainment and it is easy to arouse and sustain listenership of the audience. The fact that the

information is about the target audience’s own diverse reality and is been disseminated in an

entertaining manner, most times contribute to the positive reception of the materials.

RTSA has also embarked on school initiatives where the Agency has deliberately designed

programmes to help school-going children use the road safely. This was achieved by training

road safety patrons, who in turn teach the children about road safety through the road safety

clubs that have been established in schools close to heavy traffic. So far the Agency has

trained 641 patrons from 484 schools around the country. A total of 204 road traffic wardens

have been trained in 116 schools country wide. Road traffic wardens ideally assist children

cross busy roads at peak hours.

Without doubt the initiative to educate the children through clubs in schools is a very good

initiative. This is because children account for a big number of the casualties and fatalities

from road accidents. Passengers from public service vehicles also represent a statistically

high number of road accident victims; therefore there is need for Agency to develop specific

channels of communication to deal with public service drivers. Drivers’ clubs should be

established by RTSA in all the bus stations and patrons can be trained by the Agency to spear

head the Clubs’ activities. When they drivers get the messages from people they can easily

relate to, it would be easier for them to easily internalize the messages.

63

According to the diffusion theory it is very difficult for people to adopt new initiatives unless

the initiatives are disseminated by a familiar figure, someone that they could easily associate

and relate to, Change Agents.

However, in most parts of the world, the researcher found no literature available that

specifically shows channels that targets the public service drivers. Most of the literature

review just discusses the channels used for road safety in general.

6.5 Research question 5: How have messages from RTSA transformed driver’s

attitudes, behaviour and practices on the road?

It was established during the research that most of the drivers thought that the initiative of

RTSA was a good one. Two main reasons particularly stood out as reasons why RTSA was

beneficial to the public; the first one was that the drivers felt safe on the road as they knew

that RTSA would take care of all the bad drivers on the road. The second reason was that

RTSA endeavoured to remove all the unlicensed and presumably learner drivers from the

road and thereby ultimately preventing road traffic accidents. Other reasons given were that;

RTSA helped reduce contravening of traffic offences and it also helped control traffic.

From the group discussions conducted most drivers indicated that careless behaviour was

reduced on the road because they were aware of the consequences of flouting traffic rules if

they were caught by a traffic officer.

Very few people however thought that RTSA had no benefits to the general public. They

particularly accused RTSA officers of abusing their powers by victimising ‘innocent drivers’

on the road. One driver stated that he saw no purpose in the establishment of RTSA and

proposed that the Agency be dissolved and its duties transferred to the City and Municipal

councils located around the country.

64

The two most relevant distinct approaches to road safety are: To bring safety to the front of

the mind and The Human Consequences Approach.

The message that delivers the most impact and which stands the best chance of promoting

safe or safer driving is the one with the human element, in particular the death or injury of

loved ones. Some people indicated that the injury or death of others is of greater concern to

them than their own injury or death.

The Human Consequences approach does not work for everyone and it appears to work more

effectively with females than males. Some males rationalize the human consequences

approach as being unlikely and a matter of bad luck rather than bad judgement, and thus are

unlikely to encourage safer driving. Among this group, the threat of fines, loss of licence and

of status has a greater effect.

The human consequences approach therefore clearly seems to fail when dealing with the

target community. It was established during the research that most drivers interviewed and

engaged in the FGDs were aware of road safety messages whether from RTSA or from other

sources. However, they acted in contradiction to the messages because the consequences did

not seem very apparent to them at that particular moment. For example almost all the drivers

interviewed had stated that they had either beaten traffic lights or driven in the side walk

before despite knowing that it was wrong. They indicated that the pressing matter for them at

that moment was to rush for customers and meet the day’s cashing target rather than worry

about consequences of flouting traffic regulations.

There is urgent need therefore to bring road safety messages to the front of the mind of all

drivers so that they internalize the messages and take road safety as being beneficial to them

rather than take it as a legal or government requirement. The drivers should be made to

understand that ‘their health is their wealth’ and if they contravened traffic regulations they

65

put both their lives and the lives of others at risk. They should also be made to understand

that in case of their death or injury due to bad road habits it would be their family that would

be made vulnerable due to their carelessness.

However, the fleet owners can also play a part in making sure that the bus drivers adopt

positive retention of messages from RTSA. The reason why the bus drivers flout traffic

regulations despite knowing it is wrong could be because of economic factors. During the

research particularly from the Focus Group Discussions, the researcher established that on

average most drivers earn between K900.00 and K1, 000.00 as monthly take home pay from

their employers despite them working very long hours. Some drivers stated that they start

work as early as 04:00 hrs and knock off as late as 23:00 hrs everyday apart from Sundays

when they are off from duty.

If the drivers are given decent pays this could help them focus on their work and adhere to set

traffic regulations. The majority of the people in the country are poor and public service

drivers are no exception. Therefore, due to poverty, the drivers most often worry more about

meeting the cashing requirement than about road safety.

According to the World Bank (2011), sixty per cent (60%) of the Zambian population lives

below the poverty column and 42% are marked to be in extreme poverty conditions. The

absolute number of poor people in the country has increased from about six million in 1991

to 7.9 million in 2010.

66

Figure 27: Pie chart showing respondents’ attitudes towards RTSA messages

67

CHAPTER SEVEN

RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION

This chapter will bring out the recommendations which the student came up with both from

the observations and the data collected from the field. These recommendations will be based

on the messages RTSA disseminates on road safety and how the strategies can be made

better. These recommendations will be in line with what the study sought to establish; to find

out the effectiveness of RTSA messages in making P.S.V drivers to be road craft. It will end

with the conclusion of the findings.

7.1 Recommendations

The initiative of RTSA is a very commendable undertaking which should be supported by

everyone including Non- Governmental Organisations and the private sector. This is because

of the enormous task that RTSA has of improving road safety and helping reduce road traffic

accidents which have an adverse effect on the economy of the country.

Based on this, a number of recommendations would be made:

� As an overall institution, RTSA should take into consideration to establish centres though

out the whole country. Each district should have a RTSA office. This would make

information reach even those in far fling areas like Lukulu and Kaputa.

� Through workshops and seminars, the target community can be more informed on the

need to be road smart. This can be done with the proprietors of the fleets of buses and

these in turn could go and educate their drivers.

� RTSA should consider broadening the scope of the messages it sends to the general

public. Currently there are three main messages which the audience receives through

68

mass media communication. These include; avoiding over speeding, to always wear a seat

belt and not to drink and drive. Specific messages should particularly be formulated to

target the P.S.V drivers. Examples would include messages on the dangers of overloading

and also showing courtesy to passengers on the bus.

� There is need for RTSA to partner with more organisations to disseminate their messages.

This is due to the daunting task that has been handed down to them which needs

concerted efforts from different stake holders. Currently RTSA is working with the

Ministry of Education, Science and Vocational Training and Early Childhood Education

and the Ministry of Health.

� There is need for RTSA to adequately inform the community on its mandate so that

people do not perceive them as enemies but rather as friends. If the community views

RTSA as an Agency mandated to look at their welfare on the road, they will be more

willing to internalize the messages on being road craft.

� RTSA should work out a mechanism where drivers from different stations in the same

town or even from different towns could be encouraged to share information and learn

from each other on various experiences on the road.

69

7.2 Conclusion

In conclusion it can be argued that the initiative of RTSA is a good one as it helps people

change their attitudes on the road. People have developed positive road craft skills and this

has led to the reduction in the number of road accidents in the country and invariably led to a

positive economic growth in the country. The money which should have being used in

repairing cars and treating the accident victims can be invested in more positive economic

ventures.

In carrying out its duties RTSA has tried to do its best, even going to heights of suggesting to

put some offenders to weekend imprisonment, as is the case for drunken driving offenders.

This is to make sure that people change their bad attitudes on the road. However, despite all

this, due the over increasing numbers of cars on the road, RTSA is overwhelmed. There is

need by the Government to allocate more funds to the organisation so that more traffic

officers could be employed to control the situation. There is also urgent need for the

organisation to partner with more other organisations, as the problem at hand is a huge one.

There is need for RTSA to adequately inform the public of its mandate being an educator and

not a law enforcing agency. When this is done, people would be more willing to listen to their

messages as they will have a positive attitude towards the Agency.

70

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Baldwin, J.R, S.D Perry and M.A Moffat (2004). Communication Theories for Everyday Life.

Boston: McGraw- Hill

Barnett, H.C. (1953). Innovations: The Basics of Cultural Change. New York. McGraw

Davison, W.P (1959). “On the Effects of Communication” in Public Opinion. Vol.5:26-53

Hancock, A. (1981). Communication Planning for Development. Paris: UNESCO

Herbst AJ. (2002). The cost of Medical Rehabilitation Care for road accident victims at

public hospitals. In Report of the Road Accident Fund Commission 2002.Pretoria, Ministry

of Transport

Journal of Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol.6, pp.3183-3198, 2005

Gavin, Mooney (1977). The Valuation of Human Life. London: MacMillan Press Ltd

Lazarsfeld, P.F (1948). The People’s Choice. New York: Columbia University Press

Merriam-Webster.com (2013). Knowledge. Accessed on 20 June 2013,

http://www.Merriam.Webster.com

Miller, K (2002). Communication Theories, Perspectives, Processes and Contexts. Boston:

McGraw- Hill

Road Transport and Safety Agency- First Quarter Report (2010), Lusaka

Road Transport and Safety Agency- First Quarter Report (2011), Lusaka

Road Transport and Safety Agency- Second Quarter Report (2012), Lusaka

Rodgers, E.M (1983). Diffusion of Innovations. New York: Free Press

United Nations Development Program (1999). Washington DC

World Bank- Zambia (2012). Washington DC

World Health Organisation (1994). International Statistical Classification of Diseases and

Related Health, 1989 Revision, Geneva

World Health Organisation (1999), Geneva

World Health Organization (2013). Global Status Report on Road Safety 2013. Geneva

71

APPENDICES

TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION

1. The road safety messages of RTSA to the general public

2. The communication sources RTSA uses for road safety messages

QUESTIONS FOR THE RTSA SENIOR MANAGER FOR COMMUNICATION

1. What is the purpose of RTSA?

2. To what extent is RTSA serving its intended purpose?

3. Does RTSA use any prominent individuals in society to communicate its road safety

messages?

4. What prominent individuals does RTSA use to communicate its road safety messages?

5. What communication channels does RTSA use to reduce road accidents?

6. What messages does RTSA have to target the public service drivers?

7. From your statistics of road traffic accidents and traffic offences recorded, do you have a

reduction or increase in the incidents? Explain why?

8. What were the main objectives of the Road Safety Week of 2013?

9. Do you think the Agency met these objectives?

10. Why do you say it did/did not meet the objectives?

11. Which traffic offences are most commonly recorded and why do you think their

prevalence is high?

12. What major challenges do you face with regard to dealing with bus drivers?

13. What do you think should be done to enhance compliance of regulations by bus drivers?

14. As concluding remarks, what is your message to the public concerning road safety?

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION

72

TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION

1. The road safety messages of RTSA to the general public

2. The communication sources RTSA uses for road safety messages

QUESTIONS FOR THE RTSA DIRECTOR

1. What is the purpose of RTSA?

2. To what extent is RTSA serving its intended purpose?

3. Does RTSA use any prominent individuals in society to communicate its road safety

messages?

4. What prominent individuals does RTSA use to communicate its road safety messages?

5. What communication channels does RTSA use to reduce road accidents?

6. What messages does RTSA have to target the public service drivers?

7. From your statistics of road traffic accidents and traffic offences recorded, do you have a

reduction or increase in the incidents? Explain why?

8. What were the main objectives of the Road Safety Week?

9. Do you think the Agency met these objectives?

10. Why do you say it did/did not meet the objectives?

11. Which traffic offences are most commonly recorded and why do you think their

prevalence is high?

12. What major challenges do you face with regard to dealing with bus drivers?

13. What do you think should be done to enhance compliance of regulations by bus drivers?

14. As concluding remarks, what is your message to the public concerning road safety?

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION

73

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC

Your where randomly selected to participate in an academic research aimed at finding out

how much about road safety has been communicated to you by the Road Transport and

Safety Agency (RTSA). You are kindly requested to participate by answering the

following questions in the questionnaire. The information you will provide will be used

purely for academic purposes.

1. What is your sex? Tick where applicable

1. Male

2. Female

2. What is your present age? Tick where applicable

1.16-25 years

2.26-35 years

3.36-45 years

4.46 and above

3. What is the highest level of education you attained? Tick where applicable

1. Nil

2. Grade 7

3. Grade 9

4. Grade 12

5. College

6. University

4. Do you know RTSA?

1. Yes

2. No

5. What main activities of RTSA do you know?

74

1.………………………………………………………………………………………2

………………………………………………………………………………………

3………………………………………………………………………………………

4………………………………………………………………………………………

6. Do you use the following media as sources of information (Tick as apply)

Yes No

1. Radio

2. T.V 3. Newspaper

4. Internet

7. How often do you see/hear RTSA messages on the following?

Every hour Every day Every week Every month

1. Radio

2. T.V

3. Newspaper 4. Internet

8. Have you ever gotten messages from RTSA through road shows? Tick as apply

1. Yes

2. No

9. Is RTSA a good or bad initiative? Tick where applicable

1. Good

2. Bad

3. Not sure

10. Give reasons for your answer to question 9

………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………

11. Is RTSA your main source of information about road safety? If your answer is

“no” do not answer question 12 and 13.

75

1. Yes

2. No

12. Do you think RTSA’s messages on road safety are effective? Tick where

applicable

1. Yes

2. No

13. Give your reason/s to question 12

………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION

76

FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION GUIDE

Note: The questions below are not in themselves comprehensive but should be used as a

guide to the discussions with the members of the public. They should, therefore be followed

up by other questions where necessary. Please explain to the group that the exercise is purely

academic and non- political, and it is intended to establish how effective RTSA messages

have been in improving road safety awareness. The discussants should not exceed (12)

discussants.

Place of discussion:…………………………………………………………………………

Date:…………………………………………………………………………………………

1. What benefits has the existence of RTSA brought to you?

2. In what ways has RTSA helped you change some bad traffic behaviours?

3. Have you ever beaten traffic lights?

4. What were your reasons for beating the traffic lights?

5. Have you ever cut corners on the road?

6. Why do drivers cut corners on the road?

7. Have you ever driven on the side walk?

8. What is the main reason for driving on the side walk?

9. Why is it that most private cars with dents have some blue remain paints on them?

10. When joining the road, if the other motorist doesn’t give you chance what do you do?

11. Have you ever run away from a Traffic Police Officer or RTSA Officer?

12. Why do some drivers use trees instead of triangles when they have a break down?

13. Have you ever quarrelled with a passenger?

14. Do you ever overload your bus?

15. Why did/do you overload the bus?

16. Do you at times over speed?

17. Why did/do you over speed?

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION

77

QUESTION GUIDE FOR INTERVIEWS FOR BUS DRIVERS

1. What benefits has the existence of RTSA brought to you?

2. In what ways has RTSA helped you change some bad traffic behaviours?

3. Have you ever beaten traffic lights?

4. What were your reasons for beating the traffic lights?

5. Have you ever cut corners on the road?

6. Why do drivers cut corners on the road?

7. Have you ever driven on the side walk?

8. What is the main reason for driving on the side walk?

9. Why is it that most private cars with dents have some blue remain paints on them?

10. When joining the road, if the other motorist doesn’t give you chance what do you do?

11. Have you ever run away from a Traffic Police Officer or RTSA Officer?

12. Why is it that some drivers use trees instead of triangles when they have a break down

on the roads?

13. Have you ever quarrelled with a passenger?

14. Do you ever overload your bus?

15. Why did/do you overload the bus?

16. Do you at times over speed?

17. Why did/do you over speed?

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION